So, I was looking up something...

There are alot of atrocious things about Battlefield Earth, but it makes the film hilarious. Yet the film is still painful to sit through, because the editing is just designed to wear on you. I had suggested there was probably a singular Razzy for the editing in this film, and then thought to look up the Razzies for this one...and this caught my eye:

2000 - Worst Screen Couple - John Travolta and anyone sharing the screen with him - Won

I could not stop laughing. Is that true, or did someone edit that into the wiki?

Again, this film is a real ostrich to me. It has all the ingredients to be a fun good/bad, even if it could have been a competent sci-fi action flick. It's insufferable though, even on that level. It's exhausting. That's what makes it so weird.

I know Travolta gets all the limelight too, as far as performances, but Whitaker is the dark horse that actually out does Travolta...in whatever they were trying to do...which I imagine is make the audience feel tangentially ashamed for them...?

Edit: And I stand by my assessment that this film should be belly-bursting fun despite itself...but you can't enjoy it even on THAT level, because the editing is so bad. So there is a deserved Razzy here, that is at the real crux of why it's impossible to sit through the hilarity of Battlefield Earth, and it's the editing staff who really took a hammer to this craziness. I dunno if Razzies exist for such a thing, and BE is so weird in this regard that it would probably have been a one-off.